Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 5273523" data-attributes="member: 19675">My game design?  What are you talking about?I've been playing AD&D since 1977- and still in an active 1Ed/2Ed hybrid game that started back in 1985- and I've played my fighters in a variety of ways.  Dumb guys, smart guys, tactical guys, "Leeroy Jenkinses", ranged fighters, guerilla fighters, unmoving walls of meat & metal, polearm guys, in-close knife-fighters and so forth.Later editions of the game introduced even more flexibility in PC design.So I reiterate- there is no one way a class is supposed to be played.Magic has let everyone encroach on the Fighter's shtick since AD&D- spells like Mordenkainen's Sword, potions of Heroism or Super-heroism, etc.- started the trend early on.If the spellcaster wants to burn spells to fight like a fighter when he could be doing other things, let him.  When he gets stuck on the front line surrounded by foes (just like the fighter usually does) and the need for real magic is needed...well, the party will just have to wait while he fights his way out of his pickle of the moment.  (Hope no enemy spellcaster can dispel his magically-gained melee prowess...)But how does this "encroachment" issue matter to the 15 minute workday?  Now who is being selective?I specifically said in that very post that a spellslinger wouldn't be as good with a bow as someone who is a dedicated bowman.  In fact, the very next sentence is:I'm not saying that a spellcaster with a bow will ever be the equal of a warrior similarly equipped.  That's not what I'm saying with "competent" or "proficient"- I'm saying he is proficient with the weapon as per the rules of the game and can use the weapon as is intended.  He may not be able to fire 2 arrows into a single target simultaneously, but he can put one on a hostile target 50 feet away.</blockquote>

Verification